South Africa had an expanding economy at the time and CalTex was already established as an oil refiner in the country. The increasing demand for products made from refined oil and the ability to expand,…
They argue that this profit would then be used to help move blacks into positions of management. Indeed, CalTex could show that they had moved 40% of their black work force into positions once only held by whites. They also showed that their operations had moved blacks into 22% of their lower management positions. They also were paying a higher than average wage to their black workers, resulting in improved living conditions.
The argument against the utilitarian benefits of CalTex continuing to refine oil did not negate the political realities of South Africa. None of their black workers were able to unionize, vote or even travel into “white” areas without special permission. The negation of these basic human rights counteracted any good that CalTex was providing to the black community through job opportunities, improved wages or slight upward mobility. Building the plant would give tax revenue to the government and imply cooperation with the regime. I believe that it is more important for the corporation to not expand because without basic human rights, a better job doesn’t really make life much better.
I believe that as a stockholder I should have voted for CalTex to suspend operations in South Africa. This first proposition was the best way to set a good example of moral corporate governance. I would know that I would surely lose money if the other stockholders voted with me, but I would feel better about the future profits of the company. CalTex is an international company and pulling out of South Africa would not have a long-term effect. The refinery could have been sold and the corporation could have withdrawn.
As to the second proposition of not selling to the military, I believe that I would not have voted for this proposition. The simple fact is that South Africa had passed a law specifically against such actions. My feeling is that if a corporation is going to do business in a given country, they should obey the laws ...
Cite this document
(“A South Affican Investment Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words”, n.d.)
Retrieved from https://studentshare.net/miscellaneous/380421-a-south-affican-investment
(A South Affican Investment Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 Words)
“A South Affican Investment Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 Words”, n.d. https://studentshare.net/miscellaneous/380421-a-south-affican-investment.
To a certain degree, it may be correct that the possible utilitarian advantages of constructing the Caltex plant in the year of 1977, South Africa may have been significant than correct the ethical incorrect of Apartheid. And also at the same time that does not connote that Apartheid in any means, form, or appearance is ever correct or acceptable or permitted.
The SAFRI was expected to generate total revenue of $73.9 billion in 2011 which amounts to compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of 11 percent between 2007 and 2011. The most lucrative areas in food retailing are expected through hypermarkets, supermarkets and discounters in South Africa.
Justify your answer fully by identifying the possible benefits and the possible violations of rights and justice that you believe may be associated with the building of the plant, and explaining which you think are more important. The Interfaith Centre, which was involved in corporate responsibility in South Africa, believed that Texaco and SoCal, the American owners of Caltex, supported the South Africa’s apartheid system that legalized racism and deprived the blacks, human rights such as restriction from voting, collective bargaining, entitlement to low wages and living in segregated areas away from their families.
Introduction The Apartheid policies of South African Government in 1970s and 1980s provoked social unrest and brought the crisis situation for oil industry especially Caltex. The Caltex was a joint subsidiary of Texaco and SoCal (now Chevron), which operated oil refineries in South Africa and its assets were worth $100m in 1977.
However, that does not imply that Apartheid in any form or structure is right, justified or tolerable. However, there is legitimacy to the actuality that the employment opportunities granted in the plant might have been among the most appropriate means accessible for the minorities as well as the blacks in South Africa obtain means of income.
The central concept of ethics focuses on the following ideas: right and wrong; good and bad; and permissible and impermissible, depending on what culture or society it is being applied on (Driver, 2007). There is also the dilemma of weighing in the values as well as the outcomes of different decisions before coming up with a conclusion.
The paper begins by providing an overview on the various investment types and afterwards concentrates on evaluating which one is a better investment vehicle by weighing their advantages and disadvantages with respect to their various tax implications.
Such a process creates a situation for the decision-maker that he or she has never done before (Ferrell, Fraedrich & Ferrell, 2008). On the other hand, business ethics is defined as applied ethics, and is the
First is the general economic conditions i.e. the discount rate will increase during periods in which the inflation rates are high or when the foreign exchange rates are volatile (Bierman & Smidt, 2004). The second factor that influences this rate is the marketability of a firm’s security. Firms whose securities are on high demand will experience a decline in their discount rates.